CATL, Novo Nordisk, SoftBank: Global Stocks in Focus
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Better Buy: Rivian vs. Ford
Key Points Ford is outpacing the S&P 500 this year. Its focus on assembling cars in the U.S. gives it an edge in the tariff war. Rivian faces uphill hurdles to get to profitability, especially with its spending on expansion. 10 stocks we like better than Rivian Automotive › The electric vehicle (EV) revolution continues to unfold, but not every automaker is on equal footing. Furthermore, internal combustion engines still dominate the market. Investors looking to gain exposure to the future of transportation are often torn between growth-heavy start-ups like Rivian (NASDAQ: RIVN) and legacy automakers like Ford Motor Company (NYSE: F). Both have compelling narratives -- but only one stands out today as the better buy. Let's break down the case for each. Rivian: Ambitious growth, heavy costs Rivian once captured investor imagination with its sleek trucks and Amazon-backed promise. Fast-forward to 2025, and the company remains a speculative play, albeit one that's secured a lifeline from Volkswagen (OTC: VWAGY). According to Rivian's first-quarter 2025 financials, the company posted a net loss of $541 million. This is a good improvement from the $1.44 billion lost in the first quarter of 2024, but continues its pattern of deep losses as it ramps up production. A good thing to mention is the shift from gross losses of $527 million in 2024 to a gross profit of $206 million in Q1 2025. Still, Rivian continues to struggle with cash burn and supply chain inefficiencies. The big bright spot for Rivian is its strategic partnership with Volkswagen, which includes a $5 billion investment and joint development of next-gen EV platforms. This alliance provides a much-needed vote of confidence and access to global scale. However, a major new factory planned under this deal is going to cost Rivian a lot of money and could take years to pay off. Investors buying Rivian today are essentially betting that the company will not only survive but thrive after enduring years of costly expansion. It's a long runway -- but also a risky one. Ford: A legacy auto that's built to last Ford may not carry the same hype as Rivian, but it has things Rivian sorely lacks: scale, cash flow, and a dividend. Ford has put together four years in a row of solid revenue growth. Yes, annual net income is a bit up and down, but that's the nature of the car industry, especially when you've been pumping money into new things like EVs. The company has leaned into EVs with its popular F-150 Lightning and Mustang Mach-E while still maintaining a strong lineup of internal combustion vehicles that provide steady income. Even more importantly, Ford assembles over 80% of its vehicles in the U.S., giving it a relative advantage in the face of rising tariffs under the Trump administration. As reported by Yahoo! Finance, Ford expects to weather the tariff storm better than some of its rivals like General Motors, looking at a $2 billion (after offsetting $1 billion) bill versus higher estimates from GM. Still, Ford's business is not immune, since many of its parts are still sourced globally. But compared to start-ups and foreign automakers, Ford's domestic production base offers a meaningful cushion. From a valuation standpoint, Ford looks attractive. Its stock trades at a modest multiple of 14 times earnings, and it offers a reliable dividend yield of around 5.43% -- something growth-hungry Rivian can't match. Plus, after selling most of its stake in Rivian last year, Ford has sharpened its focus on its own EV ambitions. The better buy There's no denying that Rivian has potential. Its alignment with Volkswagen is a meaningful endorsement, and its brand is resonating with younger, affluent buyers. But as of today, it remains a speculative investment, with a high burn rate and no profits in sight. Ford, on the other hand, offers investors value, income, and relative geopolitical insulation relative to many competitors. While it too faces challenges -- especially from supply chain disruptions and legacy costs -- it's better positioned to ride out short-term volatility. And for investors looking to combine stability with EV upside, Ford is the more compelling pick. Verdict: Ford is the better buy today. It might not make you filthy rich overnight, but the dividend and low price tag make it a safer and more appealing play within the auto industry. Should you invest $1,000 in Rivian Automotive right now? Before you buy stock in Rivian Automotive, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Rivian Automotive wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $653,427!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,119,863!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,060% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 4, 2025 David Butler has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Amazon. The Motley Fool recommends General Motors and Volkswagen Ag. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Better Buy: Rivian vs. Ford was originally published by The Motley Fool
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Council member questions adherence to chamber contract
Questions arose at an informal meeting Monday of the Joplin City Council about how closely city officials and the Joplin Area Chamber of Commerce comply with requirements of a contract between the two parties. The discussion started with City Manager Nick Edwards talking about how economic development work is done for the city. He said the city contracts with the chamber for the services. The chamber submits an invoice for the work, the finance department checks the invoice and the chamber is reimbursed monthly for expenses. The contract requires that the invoice be submitted 'with supporting documentation within 15 days from the end of each calendar month describing the services provided and expenses reimbursable by the city incurrent in the prior month.' 'We reimburse for actual expenditures,' the city manager said, adding that 'the rest of the contract lists performance measures and activities the chamber performs.' The contract allows the city to spend up to $252,000 for what is called 'a consulting fee' for services outlined in the agreement. The contract also allows for the council to adjust the amount it will pay annually based on budget appropriations. The city a decade ago paid the chamber an annual payment of $335,000 until a 2015 audit by then-Missouri State Auditor Nicole Galloway criticized Joplin's handling of the payments. That audit specifically criticized the city for not properly monitoring its contract and expenditures paid to the chamber. That is when a written contract was put in place and the city required the chamber to submit more detailed invoices. The city manager said that monthly reports consist of 'the city manager, some city staff, the mayor and mayor pro tem meet(ing) with chamber staff to go over economic development activities for coordination meetings. They share things they are working on, leads they may have, and any changes in the economy.' Council member Doris Carlin said the contract states the chamber is to provide a monthly report to the mayor and council. She said she has never been given a monthly report. The city manager said there is monthly communication but he would not call it a report. There is a quarterly report to the council that provides a running list of 'those items I've presented to you each quarter,' Edwards said. Carlin said the contract specifies that the chamber's monthly report to mayor and council is 'to outline tasks accomplished and include statistics for each performance measure outlined.' Carlin asked the mayor if he has seen that language. Mayor Keenan Cortez said he did see that the contract calls for a monthly report. He said representatives of the MOKAN Partnership, the regional arm of the chamber, 'give us all the leads they're working on and things that are happening. Again that, for me, has been relatively informal to this point. They keep us posted and updated on all that. We do have a loose agenda we follow on all that. I don't know if that information has been disseminated down.' He described those involved as an 'economic development team,' although that description does not appear in the contract. The performance measures required by the contract are enumerated as: • Written report to mayor and council. • Quarterly presentation to council. • Timely updates to mayor and council on potential and ongoing projects as necessary. 'The city recognizes that the overall economy will affect some of the performance measures and success will be outside of the control,' of the chamber, the contract states. It continues by specifying, 'the City expects JACC to show evidence of experience in conducting comparative market and trend analyses and due diligence in amassing the detailed information necessary to support the economic development efforts.' The contract is outdated. The copy used for Monday's discussion was signed on Oct. 30, 2023, and specifies that it will be in effect for a year until Oct. 31, 2024. The discussion came on the heels of the exit of Travis Stephens, chamber president and CEO. The chamber board announced in an email June 11 that he was no longer the president and CEO and that the chamber's vice president, Erin Slifka, would oversee staff and monitor day-to-day activities while the chamber board conducts a search for a new leader. Stephens was placed at the chamber helm in 2022 with 14 years of experience in economic development work. The chamber board has advertised the job and sought submission on applications by July 25. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
5 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Road Course 'Big One' Collects 16 Cars, Brings out Red Flag at The Glen
The NASCAR Xfinity Series race, Mission 200 at The Glen, was red-flagged Saturday evening with nine laps remaining following a collision between Austin Hill and Michael McDowell that sent McDowell's car careening across the narrow track through the carousel turn. With limited spotters and the drivers still bunched up following a recent restart, the crash collected 16 cars and caused substantial damage to the barriers. All drivers involved in the red-flag incident have been seen and released from the infield care center as NASCAR crews continue to work on fixing the barriers to complete the remainder of the race. McDowell took the biggest hit when Hill hit him on the left side, trying to pass for second. This came in Hill's first race back following a one-race suspension for turning Aric Almirola at Indianapolis. While watching the replay for the first time, McDowell commented that Hill 'just turned' him. "I felt like I got two good restarts there and was able to get back and take it clean," McDowell told The CW. "I didn't rough up the No. 21 at all, but it just kinda felt like he kept trying to move me there in the carousel. I can see here, [Hill] was never going to get alongside [me] there, I was on the way out, he wasn't even alongside, he just turned me." Hill, who holds firm that he did not intentionally wreck Almirola at Indy, spoke to The CW while under Red Flag conditions. "The No. 11 had struggled a little bit in front of me for a few laps through the carousel, across the middle, and the exit," Hill told The CW booth. "I thought that if I made it up front, I could get to his left side and have positioning to get to the left-hander. Obviously, I haven't seen the replay, I don't know if I didn't get far enough beside him." In hindsight, Hill thinks he should've pulled off and gotten back in line, realizing it was not a safe corner to make a left-handed pass. "I probably should've just lifted and got back in line, tried again in another corner. I hate it for everyone involved; that's definitely not what I wanted to happen, coming back from what we had going on." Hill went on to say that it was his fault that it happened. "As soon as I saw he was staying tight to the grass, I probably should've lifted. That was definitely on me, just driver error of going for it here, the No. 88 is driving away from us, it felt like that was one of those moves I needed to try to make a move as fast as possible on the NO. 11. It's just really unfortunate." You Might Also Like You Need a Torque Wrench in Your Toolbox Tested: Best Car Interior Cleaners The Man Who Signs Every Car
